3 February 2019

Lust, Lust, Lust, and Bishops. (1)

PF believes that the crisis in the Church is to do with Clericalism. He will not blame homosexuality.

My belief is that the crisis relates to Lust. And to disordered Lust.

If an abusing priest is homosexually inclined, his problem is Homosexual Lust. If he is heterosexually inclined, his problem is Heterosexual Lust. I fail to see that there is very much practical difference between the two. I fail to see that it is particularly helpful to fling the word 'disordered' about. Does anybody seriously argue that there is any 'right ordering' in the abuse of a young girl just because it may be her vagina that is abused?

I share papa Ratzinger's view that the problem acquired vaster dimensions in that period during the 1960s when crooked individuals among seminary and university teachers were spreading the diabolical gospel that there are no absolute moral prohibitions. The dreadful problem has been shown to have peaked in the period 1965-1985.

I can see only one real difference between, say, 1970, and today. It is this: we know now that paedophilia is, at least usually, incurable. This has not always been quite so obvious, not least when there were psychiatrists who were prepared to guarantee that they had cured an abuser. (I wonder, incidentally, why some of these 'clinicians', who assured bishops that Fr X was OK now, are not being given their rightful share of the job of facing the music.)

So I do have some sympathy for some bishops who, back in the 1970s, gave a second chance to 'cured' paedophiles. Whether that same sympathy is owed to bishops who have operated cover-ups in more recent decades, I am far from sure.

If the hierarchs who meet in Rome next month, representing their respective Conferences, let PF get away with his sick dodge of blaming 'clericalism', rather than facing up to the the problem of LUST, and of profoundly disordered seminary teaching, they will have a lot answer for.

And it is not presbyters who should bear the brunt of criticism. The current crisis is the result of massive mismanagement by that Order in the Church which, with so much self-congratulatrion, used Vatican II to award itself an enhanced status in the Church. The pompous episcopal oligarchy which emerged strengthened from that disastrous gathering is a big part of the problem.

I remember Ratzinger, years ago, complaining that so many bishops, timorously faced with difficult decisions which might make them unpopular back home, kicked the ball to Rome for the CDF to do the hard stuff, and then played Mr Nice Guy on their home turf.

Is it not obvious that the current generation of Bishops is, as a whole and generally speaking, a very busted flush? If this were not true, they would have done something before now about this scandalously disfunctional pontificate.

There is an old Anglican joke about a child watching an episcopal consecration. (In Anglicanism, the coconsecrators all gather around the consecrand and impose hands simultaneously.) The kiddy asked what they were all doing.

"Removing his backbone".A second part of this will discuss , more constructively, what is to be done.

Is the Catholic Church ABS was born into in 1948 (He is the same age as Israel) worthy of being described as a Res Publica (A public thing) or La Costa Nostra (Our thing. that which is operated for the benefit and pleasure of the New Theologians and Modernists)?

Well, sadly, The Catholic Church is La Costra Nostra, and it is being operated by a revolutionary gang which pubicly seized control at the beginning of The Second Vatican Council.

Excerpt from Pope Saint John XXIII's opening speech of Vatican Two

HOW TO REPRESS ERRORS

At the outset of the Second Vatican Council, it is evident, as always, that the truth of the Lord will remain forever. We see, in fact, as one age succeeds another, that the opinions of men follow one another and exclude each other. And often errors vanish as quickly as they arise, like fog before the sun.

The Church has always opposed these errors. Frequently she has condemned them with the greatest severity. Nowadays, however, the Spouse of Christ prefers to make use of the medicine of mercy rather than that of severity. She considers that she meets the needs of the present day by demonstrating the validity of her teaching rather than by condemnations. Not, certainly, that there is a lack of fallacious teaching, opinions, and dangerous concepts to be guarded against and dissipated. But these are so obviously in contrast with the right norm of honesty, and have produced such lethal fruits, that by now it would seem that men of themselves are inclined to condemn them, particularly those ways of life which despise God and His law or place excessive confidence in technical progress and a well-being based exclusively on the comforts of life. They are ever more deeply convinced of the paramount dignity of the human person and of his perfections, as well as of the duties which that implies. Even more important, experience has taught men that violence inflicted on others, the might of arms, and political domination, are of no help at all in finding a happy solution to the grave problems which afflict them.

That being so, the Catholic Church, raising the torch of religious truth by means of this Ecumenical Council, desires to show herself to be the loving mother of all, benign, patient, full of mercy and goodness toward the brethren who are separated from her.

The revolution began much earlier than most Catholics imagine but the revolution appeared in public for the first time during Pope John 23rd's opening speech at Vatican Two when he said the Church would no longer apply discipline but fix everything with love

(Cue The Beatles, "All you need is love")

Later, this hermeneutic of revolution (an overturn of the then existing order) was secured by Pope Paul VI who told the Clergy of Rome that while he could still apply discipline he much preferred not to so that he would be loved, and so it was that he went on to refuse to meet (even privately) with a huge delegation of French Traditionalists who desired his permission for The Real Mass but he did meet publicly with mini-skirted Gina Lollabrigida, Adam West (Batman Star) and others inside St Peters on World Communication Day.

Get that? Discipline remains a legitimate option and it could still have protected the Church but if Pope Paul VI exercised discipline, men might not like him personally. He used The Papacy as La Cosa Nostra, his thing, for his own personal proclivities, passions and prejudices.

That is the face of La Costa Nostra revolution. The duties of The Pope are actualised in such a way so that The Pope will be loved by the world. (Gee, why didn't Jesus think of that gambit?)

Now, Moms and Dads, try that with your kids and see what happens. Never discipline the children just because that is a duty as a Parent (Pope), just let them grow-up selfish and undisciplined so you won't risk feeling unloved by those you have authority over and all will be beauty, truth and goodness, amidst aught but carnivals, cotton candy and unicorns.

"My belief is that the crisis relates to Lust. And to disordered Lust."

I agree.

I was divorced against my will when I was 35 and, literally, lost everything. The Catholic Church Roman Rota did not find nullity although a court in the U.S.did, initially. However, wherever my wife and her lover lived, they were encouraged and accepted in their adultery, even with the authorities knowing thefacts of the validity of our marriage and my faithfulness to our marriage.

Not a day goes by that I am not attracted towards women. But, it is MY CHOICEnot to go down that path.

The Church will not and cannot survive the dichotomy that is in place where avalid marriage is known, from the facts, but adultery is accepted and encouraged.The Pope and the bishops are fully informed regarding such injustices. They arechoosing to ignore what THEY ARE DOING INTENTIONALLY TO DESTROY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

My own faith is being undermined because God continues to allow this to happen.

It is not acceptable to me that He knows better. He is doing to all of us, whatthe Church has done to my family, to be persecuted, on and on and on.

A loving Father, who is all powerful. Does no such thing. No one here will changemy mind. My perfect plans would change if my children were wilting under what I wasallowing them to go through. I would limit their suffering, even if I knew it wasnecessary. I would NEVER, EVER allow them to be separated from me for eternity, if those I left in charge, even made them reject me at their Particular Judgment.

I would change the rules to ensure THEIR eternal salvation.

If God does not do the same, I hope He gives me the courage to reject Him at my Particular Judgment. Then, I would truly see if He really is a loving God. Now, I am having real doubts.

I do not want to spend eternity with a God who is not willing to change EVERYTHING,for a lost one who gave up, because they wilted under unjust persecution.

1) "Paedophilia" is committed against children (usually under the age of 10.) "Ephebophilia" is committed against those aged ~12 to ~16 or so. The vast majority of the sexual assaults against boys (at least in the USA) were "ephebophilia."

2) You and I both are somewhat sympathetic to Bishops who were misled into believing that ephebophiles were "cured." But that sympathy stops dead in its tracks when the same priest commits further rapes, and his Bishop hides that fact and transfers the rapist all 'round the Diocese (or the country). THEN we have a BISHOP problem.

Not so technical but germane: the disorder of homosexuality has ramifications which spring from the disorder in terms of psychology and understanding of male/female or parent/child relationships. Even if the priest is perfectly chaste, the wires are crossed. So happens I know a few homosexual and priests who are(apparently) chaste, and I think they are good guys--but that doesn't mean that they are "right for the priesthood."

Homosexual abuse is even worse than heterosexual abuse - the issue has to do with the finality inherent in nature. Both deserve severe punishment, even capital, but homosexual abuse is an order of magnitude worse because of it's defiance of nature. (When I speak of heterosexual abuse, I do not include sexual abuse of little girls, which is as inherently un-nutural as homosexual abuse).

Our inclinations have been with us since inception. From Liviticus 18-verse 22, ..."Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, because it is an abomination."... Is this so hard to comprehend? Early on we were warned? No? We could go on but this was an early warning by God to us no? Why the questions, generation after generation? Immutable law. Changeless. Beautiful. Soothing. Thank you Lord.

To Carl J, very sad comment regarding your personal circumstances. Divorce, particularly unwanted divorce, must be devastating, but is surely not God's fault, for He forbade divorce.I have no experience of this sort of situation, but God's love for us is paramount to the extent that Jesus, God the Son, became man and died for us that we might know Him, love Him, and serve Him in this life, and be happy with Him in the next. You are and always will be the father of your children, and I believe that your prayers for them will ensure that they will grow in awareness of your love for them, and even lead to renewed contact/communication as they grow older. Don't despair, loneliness is desperately hard; a daily rosary provides great spiritual nourishment. I do know that practical involvement in activities that you enjoy, perhaps sporting or cultural, or even intellectual eg. a possible degree course or whatever, can alleviate loneliness and provide a really constructive and fulfilling objective in life. God bless you and keep you.

I wonder what these bishops would say to Saint Peter Damian who sorted these problems out at the end of the first millenium The problems now are the same as then, why not the solutions ie ranging from dismissal of offenders from the clerical state to a life of penance in (essentially) a monastic prison!

Dear Karl. If any one of us knew what God was intending or why He permitted certain events and actions to occur, He would not be God.

Your emotions are the only things you can control, not what God does or doesn't do and ABS would recommend that you try and resolves this conundrum solely via the soul, especially its property of will.

No doubt, you have prolly read many bits of advice from others, but ABS has found it helpful to stand before a crucifix every day and confess that it is his sins alone that were the cause of Jesus Christ choosing to go through the excruciatingly painful passion and death on the Cross as the way to save ABS (and then a purpose of amendment for that day alone is performed).

You can only control your own self and your own emotions and if you chose (please don't, brother) eternal separation from God, our God is a loving God who will deliver unto you what you choose.

Eternal separation from Him in Hell will only punish you, and haven't you already suffered enough? If you think the madness and hatred in this world is ghastly, it is nothing compared to what will happen in Hell where you will be filled with rage and hatred for your own self, for your condition and state, and your rage and hatred will also be directed at every other soul suffering in eternal damnation and each of those poor souls will hate you with an unimaginable intensity.

Hell, in addition to the fire - into which souls willingly plunge themselves in an effort to momentarily flee the monumental madness - is a place of unremitting hatred which expresses itself, collectively, with the intensity of ten thousand Krakatoa eruptions.

You do not want to chose that, Brother.

There are innumerable brothers and sisters in the Church who love you and who, you can be sure, are bothered and pained by what has happened to you but ABS is quite sure they'd be in agreement that you adding to your suffering is not an answer.

The answer is always Jesus Christ crucified, brother. Begin every day physically or mentally, at the foot of TheCricifix and, for what it is worth, ABS will remember you every day in his prayers and Mass intentions.

God Bless you. ABS loves you and if he could take a portion of your suffering he would do so; and it might help to think about how it is that pain is the coin of purchase in the economy of Divine Love.

I wondered at Father's Christ-like patience at some of ABS's comments recently.Today's very beautiful article, and its conclusion, which only now have I had time to read, warmed my heart with hope. It makes such an excellent diagnosis of today's sickness. And the comments in response to Karl J's cry of pain, show that the love of Christ remains alive in His Church. I give Glory to God that Fr JJH has not suppressed ABS in any way, and that the latter has shown such exemplary love in his comments.Is it possible to be edified and humbled simultaneously? I think that is what has happened to me in reading this thread.God bless and preserve Fr Hunwicke, and his readers!

If an abusing priest is homosexually inclined, his problem is Homosexual Lust. If he is heterosexually inclined, his problem is Heterosexual Lust. I fail to see that there is very much practical difference between the two. I fail to see that it is particularly helpful to fling the word 'disordered' about. Does anybody seriously argue that there is any 'right ordering' in the abuse of a young girl just because it may be her vagina that is abused?

In addition to what others have said, there's doesn't appear to be any heterosexual equivalent of the Lavender Mafia promoting heterosexually-active priests and working to undermine Church teaching. Maybe that's not a difference when considering sexual acts in isolation, but it seems quite important when considering the overall phenomenon of clerical pederasty and its effect on the Church.

Everything Father says about lust, and the fashionable indulgence of it since the 1960s, being the root of the problem, is true. (And we should be reminding the world of the trendy left's support for normalising pedophilia in the 1970s.) But clericalism is indeed a factor, in that bishops acted as if the priesthood is a boys' club whose members, once admitted, can get away with anything.

Fr John Hunwicke

was for nearly three decades at Lancing College; where he taught Latin and Greek language and literature, was Head of Theology, and Assistant Chaplain. He has served three curacies, been a Parish Priest, and Senior Research Fellow at Pusey House in Oxford. Since 2011, he has been in full communion with the See of S Peter. The opinions expressed on this Blog are not asserted as being those of the Magisterium of the Church, but as the writer's opinions as a private individual. Nevertheless, the writer strives, hopes, and prays that the views he expresses are conformable with and supportive of the Magisterium. In this blog, the letters PF stand for Pope Francis. On this blog, 'Argumentum ad hominem' refers solely to the Lockean definition, Pressing a man with the consequences of his own concessions'.